|
Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, October 20 2012 @ 01:28 PM EDT |
I think that it isn't that they knew of it but that they should have known of
it, according to apple at least. I haven't read the filings (yet) though so I
could be wrong and I am basing this on what PJ said.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: bugstomper on Saturday, October 20 2012 @ 03:04 PM EDT |
Apple's complaint (document 2050, PDF linked in this article) refers to document
2022 when they say Samsung knew of the bankruptcy. Looking in Groklaw's archive
of the case I see that 2022 was refiled by the court clerk as as 2025 to correct
some filing error. What I find in 2025 (PDF in Groklaw's archive of the case) is
a long string of emails between Samsung's lawyers and Apple's lawyers over
getting the information from Samsung's lawyers about what they knew when. About
the bankruptcy, Samsung talks about finding out the details of Seagate's
involvement and the lawsuit that was related to the bankruptcy only after the
trial and as a result of digging after the juror talked to the press. Samsung
also talks about that being the only part that they are saying is cause for
declaring juror misconduct. But Apple's lawyers in the emails press for
specifically when did Samsung's lawyers learn of the bankruptcy. There is no
email with the answer, but there is Exhibit D in that PDF which is a report from
Lexis-Nexis on the juror that is similar to a credit report run on him and does
say that he had a bankruptcy.
So apparently, Apple is claiming that because Samsung had been informed that he
had a bankruptcy on his record and knew that he had not disclosed a bankruptcy,
they therefore waived all the claims that they are making now.
Samsung is arguing that the specific fact of having had a bankruptcy was not
something that he was asked about and is not the subject of the alleged lies,
which have to due with the bankruptcy-related lawsuits that they are claiming
are relevant.
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: jheisey on Saturday, October 20 2012 @ 06:28 PM EDT |
This is just Apple making unsupported accusations about Samsung. [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, October 21 2012 @ 12:16 AM EDT |
Apple's attempt to paint it as Samsung's fault that the foreman ended up on the
jury could be indicative of the extent of damage Apple thinks he has caused.
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, October 21 2012 @ 12:02 PM EDT |
Thanks to PJ, we have the information now. It was in #2022, paragraph 9. See the
replies to the next root level comment.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|